74 - Hunger in Theological Perspective

Hunger in Theological Perspective
By Edward M. Huenernarm

THE fact of hunger is evidence of our failure to deal responsibly with creation. God the Creator calls us to creative and holistic response. A mechanistic understanding of how the eco-system functions may not be allowed to blind us to faith's understanding of creative responsibility. The fact of our situation is that either by seeking our private advantage or by surrendering to a mechanistic view of the system, we have allowed ourselves to be separated from responsible activity in creation. We have not supported life with life. We have become alienated creatures, and live in a fallen world.

The question is not the preservation of a perfect system, but rather "What are we to do in a disordered and corrupted system?" What, in such a situation, does "stewardship" mean? The question of stewardship becomes a re-creative or redemptive act. Some reconciling is necessary as an adequate response in an alienated and disrupted creation.

Reconciling and redemptive activity requires, above all, human empathy and creativity. The creation of God-the eco-system-does not function autonomously. Human beings are part of that system. In fact, from this perspective, human beings become central to that system. Responsibility therefore includes humanization as the central focus of the problem. The question is not "How does the system work?" The question now becomes "How do human beings work with the system?" No longer can there be any hiding behind "How does the system work?" as though that were simply a neutral question.

I

The awareness of how human beings work with "the system" becomes the-basis for repentance. The easy assumption that systems work autonomously is now seen as escape into irresponsibility. Repentance on this issue is consciousness-raising. We must discover that the way the system works to our advantage and the disadvantage of others is part of our responsibility. The unjust way of "the system" is, in fact, our way. The direction on this way needs to be changed toward the humanity of Jesus Christ. Repentance, therefore, means not merely changing our mood, but changing the way we do things

Edward M. Huenemann is the Director of Theological Studies for the Program Agency of the United Presbyterian Church, U.S.A. He holds the doctor's degree from Princeton Theological Seminary, and he has also taught in the religion department of Hanover College.

75 - Hunger in Theological Perspective

together. Without such mutual effort, repentance cannot lead to any meaningful or honest public profession of the Christian faith.

It is the doctrine of reconciliation and redemption which raises the question of individual and socio-political repentance to the center of the hunger issue. The hunger issue is the concrete occasion for renewed understanding of why politics (in a basic sense) is a primary concern among Christians who would give visible testimony to the doctrine of reconciliation and redemption.

The hunger issue is the point where creation and redemption, theologically understood, can be seen as meeting. It is a point where the natural sciences (and their understanding of the systems) and the human sciences (in terms of their understanding of politics) must converge, where politics in the classic sense now becomes the central question. And so politics is the way in which the human system moves together or is capable of functioning, the way in which human life can be arranged, ordered, and freed. Political science is, from both a theological and a practical perspective the point from which the hunger question has to receive its solution. Hunger then becomes not just a literal question but a spiritual question. It becomes the question of the human spirit. It is the concrete occasion against which the quality of the human spirit will be tested, not just individually, but systematically. And thus there is some sense to a phrase like "bread from heaven" as a necessary prerequisite for human distribution and sharing on this earth. The issue becomes a matter of human fulfillment as the science of politics deals with human interaction and the question of community.

II

There is need for the church to recover a sense of its own corporateness and community before it can deal seriously with the hunger issue. The first task of the church is to face hunger in the church. I'll make a guess that most of the millions of hungry people in America are active church people. The percentage of poor belonging to the church is higher than the percentage of rich belonging to the church. If that is not true statistically, it is probably true in terms of activity. Unless the church understands itself as part of that hungry corporate body, it will see itself as the imperious rich man helping the pauper, instead of identifying with the poor. The identity of the church is with the hungry. It is not as though the church is simply rich, talking to the hungry. It may be all right for people in the church to rob Peter to pay Paul, but they ought to recognize that both Peter and Paul are in the church. Therefore, the concept of the corporateness of the church, and an understanding of it, is important. Corporateness in the church means that the prosperous need to hear what the hungry are saying. It is conceivable that the hungry have something to offer to those who do not hunger.

The church needs to fight against its own excessive religious individualism. I suspect that if you have to pick a single theological point

76 - Hunger in Theological Perspective

which serves as a barrier to dealing effectively with hunger it is the American excessive belief in individualism: "God and I," as though the religious question were solely one of "my" relationship to God. Biblically there is no such relationship except in terms of the relationship to one's neighbor. The two great commandments-"Thou shalt love the Lord" and "Thou shalt love thy neighbor"-are basic to this issue. But in America, I think we will have a particular problem because of our religious heritage and its emphasis on individualism which tends to subvert the likeness and correlation of the two commandments.

The church, therefore, must project a political vision. First-for itself. That is, to ask itself "What does it mean to be a body of people?" But, having raised that question for itself, it must also project a political vision not only for itself but for human life as a whole. The dream must find expression to save us from unreal reality. That is the heart, in this issue, of the theological task. You know what happens if you start pressing the issue hard. It sounds like a dream, and you will be accused of being unrealistic. But if you start talking realistically, then you are accused of being a cold realist without dreaming. Well, that is the old theological problem, as old as Adam and Eve. I should like to suggest that at the moment I don't see anybody projecting this dream.

A youth group in our local church, fifteen high school students, were asked this question: "How long do you think the world will last?" Thirteen of the fifteen said it would end before the year 2000, in other words within their own lifetime. Asked for what primary reason, the answer was "hunger." Now, when thirteen out of fifteen suburban teenagers feel this way, we are not having dreams but nightmares. And unless the church can project, more effectively than it has, the dream of the Christian faith to counter the nightmares of our next generation, I don't think we can successfully address the issue. The truly hungry, of whom there are millions among us, are starving, yes-but not at the rate the next generation is already starving in terms of anticipation. When there is enough hunger in the world to make the next generation believe that they won't live past 40 years of age, then I am suggesting that our young people are dreaming dreams and seeing visions that demand our understanding and response. So my final plea is that the church symbolically-even mythically-address the question of hunger as something more than a pragmatic question. The issue is perilously close to being central to the survival of what is human in our life . . . including the dreams.